About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 42 of about 43 (some duplicates have been removed)
to minimize surface disruption on columbus avenue between union and powell streets. [speaker not understood] discussionses with north beach community groups including renew sf, washington square park, friends of washington square park, telegraph hill dwellers, joining the development of the final supplemental seisseir, from 2006 to 2008. during the environmental review period, presentationses were made. comments received, and incorporated into the final environmental document. now, since 2006, the project held 10 community meetings in north beach to inform residents, business owners and organizations of the proposed construction activities. during the project's ten-year planning and development process, other retrieval shaft options along stockton and columbus street right-of-way were evaluate and had presented to the public including the option of removing the tbm from the chinatown station site. the environmental process concluded in 2008 that constructing the retrieval shaft on columbus avenue would cause the least disruption to traffic and public access to locals and businesses. now, th
location. now, option 3 before you is leaving the tbm head under columbus avenue. now, this option would require additional environmental study. also, the tbms would be encapsulated, large obstacles that would be difficult and disruptive to remove at a later date. this option would also complicate a future extension of the line and/or station. and abandoning the tbms in the ground object columbus would require the sfmta to compensate the contractor for the loss of resale value to machines, removing the tbm trailing gear, and also could cause some potential schedule delays to the existing tunnel contract and station work. option 4 is removing the tunnel blowing machines at 17 31 powell street, commonly known as pagoda palace. this would require additional study. the property is a former cinema, it's currently empty and dee cap itherctiontion, however, the property owner has obtained the approvals from the planning department to redevelop the property at the mixed use retail and residential development condominiums over some ground floor retail. * dee cap it it would require demolishing t
, the base plan to take the equipment out of the center of columbus occur. i would like to endorse what mr. reiskin, the director of the mta suggested was the possibility at the beginning of today's meeting. that is that you accept the return here if option 4 and option 3 are not possible, that they would ask the mta to come back here to the board with or without public comment but certainly just to listen for all of us in public to know why option 4 and option 3 are not possible. and i commend mr. reiskin and director [speaker not understood] for listening for the first time to the community. i think they've done an excellent job in trying to find out what it is that the businesses are so concerned about. i think that i can say if we can't go to the pagoda palace or choose option 3 instead, we would certainly withdraw this lawsuit. i've met privately with the mayor about that and we confirmed that in writing to him and to christine [speaker not understood], that we are not trying to stop the subway at all, but only we're concerned about preserving the community in north beach. i myself te
] not only do we have the business, and they want to dig a huge hole in the middle of columbus avenue and union. now, i ask the last meeting, i asked the last meeting, why section 1 have to be done after 2, 3 and 4, can't pick any of those? they said, well, that's what you need. you need a station in north beach so more people coming in. when the station going to be done? it's not even on the books. it's not even -- money, nothing. 10 years from now, 15 years from now? this is 1989 to 2012 to be starting. when the station north beach going to be? there's no money, there's no plans, there's nothing. i'm going to be retired. i'm not even going to make it work. my business is going to go down. they're not going to listen. i asked mr. funge to talk russian. he told me that's what we need. he stationed north beach. what is the plans? where is the money? there is not a plan that can be done. it can be the business, it can be the machine underground. pagoda [speaker not understood], fine. but number one, we all vote last meeting, it was no, absolutely not. that's north beach, that's us. the
columbus avenue, would respond to the disruption concerns raised by some members of the north beach community. the challenges with option 3 include also a tight timeline in which to obtain the additional project funding, complete the additional engineering work and execute the necessary contract modifications to move this work forward. now, it is important to note that consideration of extending rail service into north beach and fisherman's wharf would be a separate effort given that funding has yet to be identified for the planning design or construction of a future station and/or line, but it is worthy to note it is currently planning a design this winter to begin the community discussions regarding such an extension. now, staff recommends as its first preference to further evaluate option 4 with a back up plan to further evaluate option 3 until february 1st of 2013. now, if the necessary reviews and approval cannot be obtained at this time, staff recommends that the project focus on constructing the approved retrieval shaft. thank you for the opportunity to brief you on the centr
when we came back four years later and said, here we are. we're about to start tearing up columbus avenue. so, i think it's a point well taken we heard loud and clear from the community that we should have done, and from president chiu, that we should have done a much better job on that. so, i want to acknowledge that. so, but we did hear loud and clear from the community not just on the process issue, but on the substance of what this project would mean to the north beach community. and i think what we came down to is there are trade-offs to be made. i think the option that we're recommending that is our first choice, which is basically still enabling us to remove the machines from the ground, but doing it off of the public right-of-way. and in doing so, perhaps stimulate movement on a project that has -- a property that's become a blight to the community really represents a possible win/win scenario where we preserve the maximum flexibility for the community for whatever future extension there may be. but we are able to do so in a way that doesn't create the disruption that the
don't have to take this thing out through columbus avenue. we could have taken it out through the park and left the roadway open. but we had even more vocal opposition to the people who didn't want to harm a single tree or a single blade of grass. this was the compromise that was intended to mollify the public. there is nothing wrong in principle with pagoda option. it's just there are additional costs there. they have to come from somewhere. my city is not a trash dumb. i don't want to leave anything in the ground. that's a practice that should have stopped with washing the ships into the store line and the gold rush era and filling in the bay to extend the shoreline. we want people to pick up our trash, to separate our recyclables, to reuse, repurpose what we can * to practice sustainability. to set leadership by example. do whatever you have to do, but let's not leave these pieces somewhere in the ground where they're going to be someone else's problem, but someone else's problem at our expense. thank you. >> our next speaker, please. >> julie christian son, joan wood, fannie renwa
for a future project should it continue up columbus avenue. but that's on the cost side. on the benefit side, we would be relieving north beach of that 9 or 10 months of construction impact that they would be seeing now for a project that they won't at least directly benefit from for many years down the road. so, it is a trade-off. i think it's a reasonable trade-off to make, that the point that i think you'll hear from many speakers -- and we've heard from the supervisor, it's just not fair to subject us, this neighborhood to that amount of disruption when the benefit is so far out and uncertain at that. and i think that's a reasonable position and a reasonable trade-off and that's why we are recommending that as our kind of backstop plan. if we're unable to make something happen off-site. * the final thing i think you'll hear from folks is kind of our final backstop, which is if for some reason going to the pagoda site doesn't work and for some reason we can't make leaving it underground work, which i don't anticipate we would have trouble doing, but we don't have that fully designed and a
that february 1st, 2013, is probably two days before you're going to start digging the trench on columbus avenue. also it seems like to me, based on our future or our past business together, that this is an item to a bees us when the real serious matter is paragraph 3, which says, if we can't do options 3 or 4, we're going to do what we had originally intended. i think that's all i had to say. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> lance carnes, steve taylor, lorenzo petroni. >> mr. carnes. good afternoon, mr. carnes. >>> yes, nice of you to hear us today, board members. i'd like to underline again about the community input and the communication to the neighborhood. i've gone to maybe five or six meetings over the last several years and i was told what was going to happen, but there was no input. and i feel like the first input opportunity that we had was after two community organizations wrote kind of stern letters and we scheduled a meeting for november 19th. and a lot of people showed up, i think it was 90 people i believe, and we were presented five options on a piece of paper like this
Search Results 0 to 42 of about 43 (some duplicates have been removed)